“…for the growing good of the world is partly dependent on unhistoric acts; and that things are not so ill with you and me as they might have been, is half owing to the number who lived faithfully a hidden life, and rest in unvisited tombs.” - George Eliot’s "Middlemarch"


Marxism is the philosophy for the greedy, selfish, ignorant, naive, gullible and stupid.

"But it can't be greedy, it gives land and resources to all the people!" they say. Where in the history of Marxism has this occurred? Never!
Sure, the peasants (aka proletariat) worked and lived on the land, but only b/c they were forced to. The land was never theirs. Nothing was theirs, not even the food in their bellies, as this was 'government property' (wrongly called 'the people's property'). The people were forced out of their homes onto designated areas and put to slave labor by force.

"But surely, Marxism isn't selfish. It redistributes resources and wealth to the needy!" some will say.
When has this ever achieved "economic equality" like it was supposed to? Under Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Lenin, Gorbachev, Peron, Hitler, et. al., did the poor ever rise to the economic status like their wealthy Marxist rulers? Never! The poor got poorer under Marxism, but they were continuously led to believe life was better. The working class lived as dogs as their Utopian ruling class lived in luxury; this trend continues today.

"But Marxism is a philosophy to be understood by the educated, not the stupid, gullible, naive and ignorant!" others will claim.
Then why did so many failures of mass proportion come out of socialist and communist nations? Why did they never correct their failures, but instead, continue making the same mistakes over and over? Equality of anything never condensed into a reality. Minorities, and people in general, stayed weak economically, socially and politically. Wealth redistribution only went to the ones in power, as did the land. Power never lay in the hands of the masses, but only the few in power.

There has never been a Marxist country or society where the goals of that philosophy were achieved. Not one instance! Yet, there are people who lie to themselves and believe it so.

So, my friend, once again, Marxism is the philosophy for the greedy, selfish, ignorant, naive, gullible and stupid. If someone believes the opposite, then I hope your life as a pawn and cannon fodder isn't too painful and oppressive. May you be forever happy with the inequality and abject failure of Marxism. Ignorance is sometimes bliss as some say.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Note: What is the difference between Marxism and socialism, communism, national socialism, fascism, etc.?
In a nutshell, Marxism is the philosophy (idea) of government and it's relation to society. Socialism, communism, national socialism (Nazi) and fascism are different forms of government which operate under the philosophy (idea) of Marxism. Socialists, communists, nazi's, fascists, etc. are ALL Marxists, as they all share core principles of the Marxist philosophy. Hopefully that clears the confusion up. To simplify: Marxism = general idea. Socialist/communist/nazi/etc. = forms of government.

**To the under-educated: Contrary to popular notion, fascism is a form of Marxism. Mussolini, like Adolf Hitler, created his own unique form of government based upon the Marxist philosophy. Many, many books exist which elaborate upon this. Fascism and Nazism are very similar to Stalin's Communism and Mao's Communism, along with other communist and socialist dictators. They are not polar opposites.

Random Thoughts

Freedom is a right for all of mankind, but more importantly, a responsibility for individuals choosing to be free. Just because a right exists on paper does not mean that right actually exists in society. More often than not, it doesn't. Look at China, Russia, Cuba, North Korea, Mexico, Phillipines, etc. for examples. They all have “rights” listed in constitutions and other sorts of legal documents, but none are actually practiced. Anyone who believes that government secures their freedom is the equivalent of a pig believing the butcher keeps it safe.
This doesn't mean government is worthless, but only means the power and reach of that government should be limited and constantly kept in check by the people themselves.

If you don't have something worth dying for, then you have nothing worth living for.

Forcing one man to give what another man wants or needs is not freedom, but slavery for both. Dependence for one, servitude for the other.

Politicians definition of 'freedom' and 'equality' means everyone but themselves in chains; whether physically, intellectually or financially makes no difference.

Knowledge truly is power. Which is why it shouldn't surprise anyone that the parents of home-schoolers face prison time, despite the lack of media attention...
Despite more and more funding each year, the US public (aka government) education system produces ignorant, uneducated and barely literate children / adults.

If you don't believe the mainstream media spreads propaganda for the benefit of themselves and those in power, then you must like that taste of kool-aid!

The fool who said, "Violence solves nothing!" never met tyrants like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Mao, Pol Pot, Lenin, Peron, Castro, etc.

Can't wait for the DMV-style run government-healthcare system! Perhaps FEMA or TSA employees can assist the incompetence?

Germans gave up their personal firearms and consented to their complete protection by their government; Hitler and the National Socialists did a fine job of that! Disarming societies has always been a primary goal of tyrants, and almost always leads to the oppression and demise of that people.


Evolution Misconceptions & Myths

Some believe the theory of evolution is 1 theory, when it's really a multitude of theories under a large umbrella. For some ideas within evolution, there are multiple theories competing and even conflicting with each other. Obviously, they all can't be right.

Many believe evolution is “fact”, when it is actually theory. This doesn't mean evolution is wrong; as some parts of the theory of evolution seem to have good supporting evidence (i.e. micro evolutionary theories). It simply means there needs to be further investigation and research, along with scientific discrimination when facts seem to point some of the sub-theories into the “probably wrong” versus “probably right” spectrum. Often, bias among scientists get in the way.

People think evolutionary theory can only be studied and believed by atheists. This isn't true b/c many theories within the “grand” theory of evolution do not conflict with the Bible, Torah, or even Quran (and possibly other religious works).

Evolution does not prove that a Supreme Power does not exist, regardless of the claims; and a Christian can believe in several theories under evolution (those that are backed by science) b/c those do not conflict with the Bible. The theories of evolution (i.e. macro evolution, etc.) that do conflict with the Bible actually have little to no scientific evidence to support the claims.

Many make the claim that since humans share a large percentage of DNA with various primates, this proves humans came from apes, but that's assuming a lot and not basing it on fact. Humans share about 25% of the same DNA as rice grains, around 50% with bananas, and this goes on and on.

Darwin (1809–1882) himself never made the claim that humans evolved from apes.

The skeletal “discoveries” which supposedly proved the “missing-link” (ape to human) have all been scientific mistakes or even intentional frauds. The “missing-link” is still missing.